Dream Ship: Destroyer

from Sins Forums
So; I have been jonesing for a Destroyer now; something pretty high on the tech tree, between capital and Cruiser; and probablly should be the only one of its class.

Combat wise, I think it should be a smaller adaptation of the Kol; IE the TEC's second scratch built combat vessel... maybe one beam, with a much tighter arc, and 2-3 turrets. Maybe a very expensive upgrade giving it a fighter capacity of 1. Cost would be pretty high, maybe just 1000 credits less... in combat, I would think one of these backed up by a Dunov of say Level 2, should be able to barely scrape by/kill a Kol level 1...

I want it to look powerful, be armored with nice weapons, but ultimately not combat cost effective when compared to frigates OR capital ships...

So why buy one?

The abilities i have in mind would be a 'anti missile' missile system or pin-point laser, that would significantly hamper LRMS... but cost anti-matter of course. Also the abilitiy to send a 'Phase Probe' which would basically go to a targetting phase jump lane in the system and scout the other end briefly. That might step on the scout ship's role, but you wouldn't be spamming these ships, you might have 1 in a big fleet just for the scouting support and missile defense.

So at any rate what is your dream ship?
39,096 views 47 replies
Reply #1 from Sins Forums Top
Destroyer Class Ships. Somewhere inbetween cruisers and battleships.

- Sports 2 special abilitys
- Can gain expierence
- Cost less supply compared to equivalent frigates but costs more resources then equivalent frigates. I.e it goes easy on the supply , but costs a bit too much.
- Doesnt hold fighters or bombers
- Tend to be more heavy weaponed then heavy armoured compared to equivalent battleships
- On the Research Tree , One research unlocks Destroyers and it is a military research at Level 5 called Destroyer Shipyard.
- The Destroyer shipyard , allows construction of 4 types of Destroyer.

Cant wait to get my hands on the forge tools..to mod this in.




Reply #2 from Sins Forums Top
this could prove to be an acid to your existing armada. i love it!

we gots to have destroyers as part of the ships list of military campaigne for both human and ancient race. we are talking about tecs survival and to all means they would be wild enough to come up with such a weapon to justify the rights of cause.

3types of destroyers would be nice. Ionic Destroyers with say maybe 5turrets and a missle battery launcher. Missle Destroyer wich consist different tyeps of missles. anti fighter missles to anti capitalship cruise missles with few turrets and Plasma burst Destroyer specially equiped for anti psy tech.

don't want to stray off topics but, do any of you guys know if IC will be introducing a heavy corvette anti fighter ship? besides the flak frigate?

Elemental: Reforged
Reply #3 from Sins Forums Top
Actually, a 'destroyer' hull would be between a frigate and a cruiser, I believe, in current naval terms Not that I'm opposed to the idea!
Reply #4 from Sins Forums Top
Meh, screw current terms Ive never liked the idea of Destroyers being smaller than 'cruiser'

personally I think having more than 1 type and its own shipyard is a bit much to balance right now; more importantly I want one unit so I can say THE DESTROYER.

Another limitation would be it cannot bombard planets.
Reply #5 from Sins Forums Top
Ultimately, I'm not sure if another ship class can be added for launch, but I'd expect to see them added in expansions/content updates. Keeping fingers and toes crossed, anyway
Reply #6 from Sins Forums Top
Actually, a 'destroyer' hull would be between a frigate and a cruiser, I believe, in current naval terms Not that I'm opposed to the idea!


Agree.
Reply #7 from Sins Forums Top
I think the game needs a lot more units both Destroyers and Battlecursers. The game also needs bigger fleet supplies to allow for larger fleets.
Reply #8 from Sins Forums Top
Actually, a 'destroyer' hull would be between a frigate and a cruiser, I believe, in current naval terms Not that I'm opposed to the idea!


Agree.


True but what would you rather have

Reply #9 from Sins Forums Top
If we had destroyers then I'd want the Super class ships
Reply #10 from Sins Forums Top
well we hae the small shipyard construct frigates and cruisers, why not have the large one construct destroyers and capships?
Reply #11 from Sins Forums Top
I think the game needs a lot more units both Destroyers and Battlecursers. The game also needs bigger fleet supplies to allow for larger fleets.


On large multi-solar system maps, it's actually quite easy to amass fleets in the several hundreds of ships. On one map I played with 5 solar systems, 4 players. Each player started in their own 8-planet system and the central had some crazy number of planets. I easily had 8 capitals (320 fleet supply points) and about 200 total of assorted ships of all kinds in my main fleet, and that was about half the map colonized/upgraded for fleet supply.
Reply #12 from Sins Forums Top

Actually, a 'destroyer' hull would be between a frigate and a cruiser, I believe, in current naval terms Not that I'm opposed to the idea!


Given that the game doesn't use "proper" naval terms...

As things stand, frigates are you combat ships, and cruisers support. (For this reason, I support switching colony and kodiak craft around)
Reply #13 from Sins Forums Top
I sorta like this idea... I all for more ships and diversity!
Reply #14 from Sins Forums Top
goody! Wouldn't it be nice to have just a heavy Kodiak with excellent support options? But costly enough that you wouldn't have more than 2 hanging about? (or rather 1 per fleet)
Reply #15 from Sins Forums Top
a 'Phase Probe' which would basically go to a targetting phase jump lane in the system and scout the other end briefly. That might step on the scout ship's role, but you wouldn't be spamming these ships, you might have 1 in a big fleet just for the scouting support and missile defense.


Vasari ability that I quite certain of, they can already send false signals down phase lanes.

Plus thats what you have scouts for.
Reply #16 from Sins Forums Top
the scout is just too weak for late game adventuring... thus the destroyer... or rather its more convenient to keep it in a fleet. If the Vasari have it, then fine, they should keep it.

I would still want a destroyer though.
Reply #17 from Sins Forums Top
So do we all.

You must keep in mind that even Beta 4 will not be the complete game, the devs are saving a few secrets for the release.
Reply #18 from Sins Forums Top
I must keep in mind that we may also be seeing enough of the game; and that there is no Destroyer at yet. Not suggesting it will certainly not help. Where as suggesting pro actively may get me Destroyers. And heck if I try and find out it was already there... boo hoo wasted text? If I don't try and its not there, we get no Destroyer


We should chant... Loudly for everything we want, but also reasonably and continue to praise the very good things they have done. Sometimes it gets too negative here.
Reply #19 from Sins Forums Top
Meh, screw current terms Ive never liked the idea of Destroyers being smaller than 'cruiser'

If you don't like what the current terms mean perhaps you should search for other terms. Like "maneater class".
Reply #20 from Sins Forums Top
maybe one beam, with a much tighter arc,


Not possible, since all firing arcs are 180°.

in combat, I would think one of these backed up by a Dunov of say Level 2, should be able to barely scrape by/kill a Kol level 1


A lvl 2 Dunov can already kill a lvl 1 Kol...

The abilities i have in mind would be a 'anti missile' missile system or pin-point laser, that would significantly hamper LRMS... but cost anti-matter of course. Also the abilitiy to send a 'Phase Probe' which would basically go to a targetting phase jump lane in the system and scout the other end briefly. That might step on the scout ship's role, but you wouldn't be spamming these ships, you might have 1 in a big fleet just for the scouting support and missile defense.


So you want to mix fighting capabilities, scouting capabilities and support capabilities in one ship?

Sounds just a bit... imba.
Reply #21 from Sins Forums Top
I do seem to recall another Destroyer thread a while back that went on for some time, but never resulted in anything. FYI.
Reply #22 from Sins Forums Top
Somehow I think the devs could restrict the arc more; but there are other ways to balance it Vandenburg, cost; cool down timer etc.

I want it to seem like a combat ship, but ultimately fall short compared to an equal supply/cost's worth of Kodiaks, Light Frigates or Capital Ships. Its value isn't in combat, its just beefy enough that player's will LIKE it. Its value would be the extreme convenience on its abillities.

Flak/Missile Defense/Scouting... these are the general abilities of an escort Destroyer, and yes we put these in one package in real life, so why not in fake life? At any rate I wouldn't give it all 3 abillities, I would give it 2. Think of it as a super heavy scout ship. It wouldn't make scouts obsolete as they are just so cheap, and the Destroyer would be far down the tech tree, but it would be useful to scout systems by a fleet as a whole. OR don't have its stregnth be scouting as the Vasari will have phase probes.

Instead it can have an anti-missile ability/upgrade would be nice to protect my fleet from LRMS.

Its not that I want an unballanced uber ship at all. I just want a cuddly Destroyer model in the game. Make it's armor swiss cheese I'd still be happy. I also feel it fits the story of the TEC; it could be quite high on the tech tree and represent the results of the learning experience of building the Kol.

Notably I didn't realize a Dunov did that; but you get the point, it shouldnt be able to stand up to a Kol unsupported.
Reply #23 from Sins Forums Top
Flak/Missile Defense/Scouting... these are the general abilities of an escort Destroyer, and yes we put these in one package in real life, so why not in fake life? At any rate I wouldn't give it all 3 abillities, I would give it 2. Think of it as a super heavy scout ship. It wouldn't make scouts obsolete as they are just so cheap, and the Destroyer would be far down the tech tree, but it would be useful to scout systems by a fleet as a whole. OR don't have its stregnth be scouting as the Vasari will have phase probes.


Agree.

Notably I didn't realize a Dunov did that; but you get the point, it shouldnt be able to stand up to a Kol unsupported.


Yes. Destroyer should be something stronger then frigate but shouldn't be able to stand up a Crusier.
Reply #24 from Sins Forums Top
No I actually prefer it being equal in attack to Cruiser, but with greater armor. Just not cost effective.

I hate the idea of a Destroyer being smaller than the term Cruiser. If we must we can refer to my idea as the Battle Cruiser instead. Which in nautical terms is more accurate.
Reply #25 from Sins Forums Top
then we could have 2 Battle Cruisers and 3 Support Cruisers... i like this much beter. solves the whole "cruisers suck" problem. but then we dont get the cool "destroyer" class and were kinda back to square one only with a cool new Battle cruiser, making the Kodiak less loanly